PowerBASIC 10

[Patrice Terrier]

Edwin,

When Bob wrote "Unused code is removed from each SLL as it's created".
I think he had something else in mind.

Anyway i am sure that unused SLL won't be embedded in the final EXE at LINK time.
SLL is rather an OBJ than a LIB.

Thus there is a PowerBASIC LIB equivalent, to embed several SLL altogether: PBLib.

...

[Theo Gottwald]

I understand you, Edwin. We have all more wishes then possibly this next version can fullfill.
While - i can't say because its not yet out!

But anyway i am sure it will be one of the most welcome releases for me - ever!.

Leave away the SLL's if you don't like them so much.
Did you read when Bob said that he increased compiling speed by another 400% !!!

Why did people in earlier years use these UNIT-Libraries?
Yes for selling stuff.

But mostly because the compiling process was taking long time!

This is not the case with PB!

Believing the numbers i have heared from Bob, even your largest project will compile in 0.3 seconds!
You can just take a breath and its compiled and linked!

Then for what do you need UNITS?

Just put all your stuff in "INCLUDE" Files, and voila you have the "Dead Code Removal" as you want it.

After all, we can always look for a hair in the soup and if we look long enough we will find one.
But this new release opens a lot new doors once its out, especially with the "Dead Code Removal" - it also works inside OBJECTS!

I have for myself taken the consequence and decided, that when i re-organize my libraries for PB 10 (and they are large over the years) I'll just always INCLUDE them. All my collected PB Libraries .... always available. They will be Compiling in 0.3 seconds ... with PB 10.

[Patrice Terrier]

It is my understanding that PowerBASIC static linking, will be very welcomed by some of the third party addon providers.

...

[Edwin Knoppert]

Yes, no more same-old-code to compile along with the compile process each time.
Protection is not really a serious issue, but sometimes.
Speed 400%, i doubt it, i assume when one precompiles his existing code to a SLL and therefore maybe it skips a '4-step' compile process? (we'll see of course )

One of the bigger issues is the debugging, it *may* help when the heart of your form engine (as in PwrDev) is skipped during debug (step-over) so one does not get bothered with code he doesn't need to inspect anyway.
That's something i would like to see in practise.

I also think that the debugger remains a problem, it's a bit slow but more of a problem is the way things work.
Like bookmarks, they are not stored for the next time, so far in PB9 and earlier it is far from a Microsoft Visual Studio.
In the early days i was pretty fast without the debugger but the projects are getting bigger and nastier, something the current debugger can't help much imo.
Also.., debugging a dll would have been nice, my biggest issue currently resides in a dll.
But asking for a solid debugger undermines my remarks about the bare-bones compiler i made earlier

[Patrice Terrier]

Edwin,

Bob, wrote a few post above in this thread, that several SLL units can be combined altogether to create a PBlib.

...

[Aslan Babakhanov]

How about changes in PB IDE and PB Forms? I suppose they're should be...
If compiler has been changed significantly, then IDE must be on the same route.

Also, the most important changes is UNICODE! It is also unclear, whether controls will be unicode capable or not?

I had to port one of my huge commercial PBWIN9 project to .NET due to one reason - unicoded controls..

Ok. Let's wait for final announcement.

[Patrice Terrier]

Aslan,

It has been said in several posts, that PB10 will have both native ASCII and UNICODE support (WSTRING).

...

[José Roca]

Also, the most important changes is UNICODE! It is also unclear, whether controls will be unicode capable or not?

Windows controls have always been unicode capable. SDKers just needed to create them using CreateWindowExW, instead of CreateWindowEx, and use the "W" API functions instead of the "A" functions with them.

[Aslan Babakhanov]

Hi Jose,

Anyway that would be better to see UNICODED DDT controls besides SDK.

WSTRING is a good step forward in the world of unicode, but i expect full unicode support.
Believe me, writing a code using SDK and API with "W" suffix to get proper unicode support is a kind digging a hole with needle. (see support for many controls).

You don't know where is the next problem may occur.  Even if you won't faced with any problems, you'll be step backward from other developers as the speed of coding with SDK including debug/edit/redesign might take some time.
May be that requires some experience to play around SDK, but i don't see cons in using SDK where your applications contains 20+ forms with complex inputs...  

Hope, I'm not put here so aggressive notes as this is my personal opinion from the real world of programming where many .NET sharks is floating around PB dolphins.  

BTW, might be interesting, In my country the government decided to switch to unicoded communication on every IT (an iT law).
That law of course affected on developers, so they're have to rewrote all commercial projects to unicode.

Forgot one point: If PB 10 supports unicode strings, then i suppose that the compiler + IDE must be capable of handling unicode strings. 

[Edwin Knoppert]

>Forgot one point: If PB 10 supports unicode strings, then i suppose that the compiler + IDE must be capable of handling unicode strings.
To me it seems every IDE uses ansicode for their properties and texts in code and converts it to unicode.
Not sure how this works but i wonder'd it myself.

[Patrice Terrier]

Aslan,

The whole API declarations are available with either a "A" or "W" append to the end of the function.

And when you write C or C++, you must choose the good declaration as well.

José, wrote that he will have a new set of include files for PB10, that will take care of that transparently.

...

[Theo Gottwald]

Aslan, i have no idea if DDT will be UNICODE or not. But take a look on Jose's new CWIndow-Class, when its available.
It looks to me like its made for Projects like your!
I have seen a preview, the HELP/Documentation for it is superb!

[Aslan Babakhanov]

Theo,

Thanks for route. will take a look at Cwindow class. looks interesting.

Cheers!

[Theo Gottwald]

Maybe Jose can give you a hint how you can get it.
Anyway - it will be the best Mix together with PB 10 because then
automatically all unused Methods are "cleaned out" at compiletime.

[Theo Gottwald]

PB-Forum down?

I only get: Service Unavailable

Maybe the run to PB 10 is too big!